21–30 of 30 posts
Perhaps it's less messy than I imagine: maybe many of the trendy named languages are just minor modifications or bridges between standards? Anyway impressed you all negotiate this minefield so well.
As someone who wants to start to learn to code to build some basic web UI it certainly is difficult to know where to start!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a great language and with the series of hackathons they planned they will spread the language and help improve it. I was on at #dart @ Freenode which is their official IRC channel today and the guys at the hackathon were building a way of using Dart to control an Arduino board. Pretty cool stuff.
Dart is such an uninspiring, imagined-in-1995 language that I still wonder if I ever find a use-case for it. This we-are-from-Google-and-everyone-else-is-stupid approach to language design is imho the real disease (also see the comment on Google Guava, that tells a lot). I just don't want to develop in a language which throws the last 2 decades of language design experience over board because they designed a language…
The article is basically marketing fluff. And the main reason to not use Dart is alluded to in a quote in it, > Dart compiles to JavaScript, so your Dart web apps will work in multiple browsers (not just ours). which is misleading, since to that should be added "but they will run much more slowly in IE, Firefox, WebKit and Opera", because none of them will embed the nonstandard Dart VM, only Chrome will.
When you're able to take Dart and reliably, run it on both the server and the web client then it may be interesting. Right now I don't see a good use case for it right now. For one, debugging client-side code is going to be annoying especially if you end up running into a bug due to the Dart to JavaScript translation. You're going to have to know Dart and JavaScript well in order to debug effectively. The other side…
It won't be "finished" (ready for ACTUAL deployment) for at least a year or so. The dev team is pretty small and the funding is pretty small. The way dart works is that it compiles into optimized javascript that the average javascripter wouldnt end up writing. The resulting code is weird and wacky, but it usually works. From my own understanding, that's the cool part.
The article is basically marketing fluff. And the main reason to not use Dart is alluded to in a quote in it, > Dart compiles to JavaScript, so your Dart web apps will work in multiple browsers (not just ours). which is misleading, since to that should be added "but they will run much more slowly in IE, Firefox, WebKit and Opera", because none of them will embed the nonstandard Dart VM, only Chrome will.
Personally unlike many people (even Dart guys) I care less about Javascript-Cross Browser compatibility. I would not mind if things work faster only in Chrome. Once there is a version of Chrome in IPhone and WP7, all bases are covered. It would be a good platform to develop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally unlike many people (even Dart guys) I care less about Javascript-Cross Browser compatibility. I would not mind if things work faster only in Chrome. Once there is a version of Chrome in IPhone and WP7, all bases are covered. It would be a good platform to develop.
There will never be a version of Chrome for iPhone and WP7 (nor Firefox, nor full Opera, etc.).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
care to elaborate? I'm not a DART developer, but by checking out this: http://synonym.dartlang.org/ it seems to me that the language is doing some great things: Getting rid of "undefined", adding a class+extend, optional params are much better compared to JS, jquery-like DOM querying.
The very first example there says > // Note: This will only work in Dartium (a build of Chromium with Dart VM) This isn't a temporary issue. Google might add the Dart VM to Chrome, but the chances of it showing up in any other browsers are close to 0. Aside from that, yes, Dart improves on some syntax issues like you said. But the compiling-to-JS approach lets you do a lot more, you can write CoffeeScript or C++ or C…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a great language and with the series of hackathons they planned they will spread the language and help improve it. I was on at #dart @ Freenode which is their official IRC channel today and the guys at the hackathon were building a way of using Dart to control an Arduino board. Pretty cool stuff.
Dart is such an uninspiring, imagined-in-1995 language that I still wonder if I ever find a use-case for it. This we-are-from-Google-and-everyone-else-is-stupid approach to language design is imho the real disease (also see the comment on Google Guava, that tells a lot). I just don't want to develop in a language which throws the last 2 decades of language design experience over board because they designed a language…
Dart's number one constraint is that it compiles to fast JavaScript. Dart's number two constraint is that it's familiar to JavaScript/Java/C# programmers. Dart's reason for being is to solve problems that arise when trying to write large applications in JavaScript, and to solve those issues faster than TC39 is. Being innovative compared to Java and JavaScript is further down the list.
If you know those things, then you might understand some of the design decisions:
Nulls, and optional typing? That comes out of the first constraint. "Boring" syntax, from the second. Inheritance? Familiar to Java/C# programmers, not to mention that many people mess up prototypal inheritance and many others use incompatible class systems. Not allowing user-defined implementations of num and String? Efficiency.
Also, just because some innovative features aren't there now doesn't mean they won't arrive either soon or eventually. Method cascades are being implemented so every API can be fluent like jQuery. Mirrors are being implemented for reflection. Pattern matching, mixin, and non-nullable type proposals are circulating. The server and browser APIs and libraries seem to be converging as time moves on.
Dart's a fine language for what it's aimed at. It's a huge step up from JavaScript. If you actually try it, you might very well like it compared to your other options.
I actually thought that the article was a joke (no offense). It starts off saying "... how you can become more productive and happier", and then: - libraries are needed. And then it proceed to describe how if you want to get something done you have to reinvent the wheel, or port it (which amounts to the same insofar as it slows you down) - Weekly updates (in particular the bit on downloading the new build and trying…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The very first example there says > // Note: This will only work in Dartium (a build of Chromium with Dart VM) This isn't a temporary issue. Google might add the Dart VM to Chrome, but the chances of it showing up in any other browsers are close to 0. Aside from that, yes, Dart improves on some syntax issues like you said. But the compiling-to-JS approach lets you do a lot more, you can write CoffeeScript or C++ or C…
That snippet is showing a comparison of JavaScript and Dart as native languages. To get the Dart sample to work in browsers without native Dart, just add this tag: Try dropping the FUD.